Obama: gay partners should have hospital access

As soon as you ask the Old Southern Man to back up his BS, he starts doing this:

[video=metacafe;1471733/crazy_drunk_old_man_dancing/]http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1471733/crazy_drunk_old_man_dancing/"[/video]
 
Southern Man said:
cuz they ain't normal
Click to expand...
Well, this is where I stopped reading. I predict that SM will use the following statements

"...it must be healthy, normal and moral right?"
"Blah blah blah queers/queer enablers blah blah blah"
"Steadfast affirmation of heterosexuality"
"Generic insult towards others sexuality"
"Insistence that said insults were in retaliation only"

It's currently 7:39 PM Eastern Standard time. As I have said, this is the last post I've read. Let's see how correct I am.
 
Weighted Companion Cube said:
Well, this is where I stopped reading. I predict that SM will use the following statements

"...it must be healthy, normal and moral right?"
"Blah blah blah queers/queer enablers blah blah blah"
"Steadfast affirmation of heterosexuality"
"Generic insult towards others sexuality"
"Insistence that said insults were in retaliation only"

It's currently 7:39 PM Eastern Standard time. As I have said, this is the last post I've read. Let's see how correct I am.
Click to expand...
It's now 7:46 PM. Well, my first two predictions were wrong. Everything else was correct though.
 
Southern Man said:
You and at least two other lib-tards here are trying to work your argument by using emotion. My argument is based on logic and reason.

It is a burden to society to allow the same privileges for the small number of folks that don't fall within societal norms. And there's simply no reason for it, when all they have to do is go to legalzoom dot com and file a simple POA.
Click to expand...

How is it illogical to allow gays to determine who gets to visit them and who gets to make medical choices for them if they are unable?

On the contrary, SM, you are the one making noise based on emotions. Your hatred is the basis for your comments.

Logic and reason would not require a small portion of a population to have to go thru legal hassles to get what the rest gets without any such hassles.

And those people do fall within societal norms. The majority of the population no longer sees homosexuality as "evil".
 
Southern Man said:
Various laws, thousands of hospital's protocols. There are reasons why hospital policies exist, and I don't pretend to be expert on any of them. Not like The One.
Click to expand...

That is pure bullshit. You know as well as I do that the visitation policies can be changed with the stroke of a pen.

And who gets to make decisions is part of the admission form. Nothing less.
 
Southern Man said:
AGAIN, Zippy, "I don't pretend to be expert on any of them. Not like The One."

What experience does your messiah have with hospital protocols? :pke:
Click to expand...

Are you actually sticking with the "hospital protocols" nonsense?

Do you think hospital protocols are static and unchanging? Do you think that it is a huge burden to change who is allowed to visit a patient?

There are hundreds of new medical procedures and thousands of new medicines each year. And you think changing who visits a patient is a burden??
 
i do not understand how anyone who wants less government intrusion in our lives has a problem with allowing gays to marry, to make certain life ending decisions for their partners, to visit their partner in a hospital as a would a family member....

family member is just lucky by birth, often family members don't even talk to each other, yet, under the current rules and laws, these potential asshole family members have more rights over someone they don't talk to, spend time with, than the homosexual's partner......inheritance, benefits, decisions

its plain stupid. what if i was just someone who never married, but had a brother i hated or a mother i rejected, and yet had just a platonic best friend that i trusted more than my own family.........
 
Yurt said:
i do not understand how anyone who wants less government intrusion in our lives has a problem with allowing gays to marry, to make certain life ending decisions for their partners, to visit their partner in a hospital as a would a family member....

family member is just lucky by birth, often family members don't even talk to each other, yet, under the current rules and laws, these potential asshole family members have more rights over someone they don't talk to, spend time with, than the homosexual's partner......inheritance, benefits, decisions

its plain stupid. what if i was just someone who never married, but had a brother i hated or a mother i rejected, and yet had just a platonic best friend that i trusted more than my own family.........
Click to expand...
Again Yurt, The government, especially the federal government, shouldn't be involved in decisions made by hospitals and their staff.
 
Southern Man said:
Again Yurt, The government, especially the federal government, shouldn't be involved in decisions made by hospitals and their staff.
Click to expand...

Why not? The general population use hospitals. More often than not a person does not shop around for a hospital. Something happens (illness, accident) that results in a person requiring hospitalization so for the "general welfare" of the citizens the government should be involved in hospital protocols.
 
Southern Man said:
Again Yurt, The government, especially the federal government, shouldn't be involved in decisions made by hospitals and their staff.
Click to expand...

When hospitals make policy that is discriminatory, the gov't most certainly should be involved.

And especially when the hospital takes tax dollars to operate, the gov't has a duty to make sure those tax dollars are not spent furthering a bigoted policy.
 
apple0154 said:
Why not? The general population use hospitals. More often than not a person does not shop around for a hospital. Something happens (illness, accident) that results in a person requiring hospitalization so for the "general welfare" of the citizens the government should be involved in hospital protocols.
Click to expand...
:lol: Do I need to school you on this non-existent "general welfare" clause again? :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top